Phase II clinical trial assessing the efficacy of enzalutamide in advanced non-resectable granulosa cell ovarian tumors: The GREKO III study (GETHI2016-01).

BACKGROUND: Granulosa cell ovarian tumors (GCT) are orphan disease with limited treatments. Hormone therapy is a potential treatment, due to the overexpression of hormone receptors in most tumors. This study explores the activity of the antiandrogen, enzalutamide, in metastatic cases. METHODS: We designed a phase II clinical trial under the Spanish Collaborative Group for Transversal Oncology and Rare and Orphan Tumors (GETTHI). Eligible participants were adult women with advanced GCT. Primary endpoint was objective response rate. Secondary endpoints included clinical benefit rate, progression-free survival, overall survival, and safety profile. Patients received enzalutamide 160 mg once daily. RESULTS: From April 2018 to March 2020, eighteen patients were screened, and sixteen were included across nine institutions. Median age was 56.4 years (range 45-71), and most were Caucasian (14 cases), one Arabian and one Latin. ECOG performance status was zero in 13 cases (81 %) and one in three (19 %). Six patients (38 %) had previously received hormone therapy as adjuvant treatment or for advanced disease, and 15 (94 %) chemotherapy. Median time from metastasis to study entry was 96 months (range 4.5-198). No objective response was observed, but the clinical benefit rate reached 68.8 % (95 % CI [46 %-91.5 %]). Median progression-free survival was 3.8 months (95 % CI [1.36-6.14]). Median overall survival was not reached, with a median follow-up of 6 months (range 2.2-19). At the time of database closure, 14 patients had discontinued treatment, 13 due to disease progression and one by personal choice. Two deaths attributed to disease progression were recorded. Five grade 3 adverse events were reported, with only one (asthenia) deemed related to the therapy. CONCLUSIONS: Although enzalutamide demonstrated modest activity in GCT, durable stabilization was observed in some cases. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03464201.

Clinical protocol phase II study of tumor infiltrating lymphocytes in advanced tumors with alterations in the SWI/SNF complex: the TILTS study.

The SWI/SNF complex is a chromatin remodeling complex comprised by several proteins such as SMARCA4 or SMARCB1. Mutations in its components can lead to the development of aggressive rhabdoid tumors such as epithelioid sarcoma, malignant rhabdoid tumor or small cell carcinoma of the ovary hypercalcemic type, among others. These malignancies tend to affect young patients and their prognosis is poor given the lack of effective treatments. Characteristically, these tumors are highly infiltrated by TILs, suggesting that some lymphocytes are recognizing tumor antigens. The use of those TILs as a therapeutic strategy is a promising approach worth exploring. Here, we report the clinical protocol of the TILTS study, a Phase II clinical trial assessing personalized adoptive cell therapy with TILs in patients affected by these tumor types.Clinical Trial Registration: 2023-504632-17-00 (www.clinicaltrialsregister.eu) (ClinicalTrials.gov).

[Box: see text].

Impact of the Identification of Nonhuman Genetic Signatures in the Diagnosis and Management of Carcinoma of Unknown Primary.

This report presents the case of a 62-year-old woman who was diagnosed in 1999 with stage I cervical carcinoma treated by surgical resection. In 2021, she presented to the emergency department with a complaint of predominantly right-sided lower back pain. A CT scan of the lumbosacral region revealed a bone lesion in the L5 vertebra and retroperitoneal lymphadenopathies suggestive of malignancy. Histology of the L5 vertebra biopsy showed a poorly differentiated carcinoma with an inconclusive immunophenotypic profile. Treatment for carcinoma of unknown primary was started with a combination of carboplatin and paclitaxel every 21 days. A genomic study of the biopsy specimen performed on the FoundationOne CDx platform identified a nonhuman genetic signature compatible with HPV. The presence of HPV 18 DNA in the specimen was confirmed by PCR-reverse dot blot, and the immunophenotypic profile was expanded, revealing strong and diffuse p16 expression, thus corroborating the molecular findings. In view of these findings, the case was reclassified as a recurrence of the cervical adenocarcinoma that had been diagnosed and treated 23 years earlier. Based on the new results, and according to first-line cervical carcinoma protocols, bevacizumab at 15 mg/kg every 21 days was added to her chemotherapy regimen. The identification of HPV DNA sequences by next-generation sequencing facilitated the correct diagnosis and led to a modification of the first-line therapeutic approach.

Efficacy and safety of erdafitinib in patients with locally advanced or metastatic urothelial carcinoma: long-term follow-up of a phase 2 study.

BACKGROUND: Erdafitinib, a pan-fibroblast growth factor receptor (FGFR) tyrosine kinase inhibitor, was shown to be clinically active and tolerable in patients with advanced urothelial carcinoma and prespecified FGFR alterations in the primary analysis of the BLC2001 study at median 11 months of follow-up. We aimed to assess the long-term efficacy and safety of the selected regimen of erdafitinib determined in the initial part of the study. METHODS: The open-label, non-comparator, phase 2, BLC2001 study was done at 126 medical centres in 14 countries across Asia, Europe, and North America. Eligible patients were aged 18 years or older with locally advanced and unresectable or metastatic urothelial carcinoma, at least one prespecified FGFR alteration, an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0-2, and progressive disease after receiving at least one systemic chemotherapy or within 12 months of neoadjuvant or adjuvant chemotherapy or were ineligible for cisplatin. The selected regimen determined in the initial part of the study was continuous once daily 8 mg/day oral erdafitinib in 28-day cycles, with provision for pharmacodynamically guided uptitration to 9 mg/day (8 mg/day UpT). The primary endpoint was investigator-assessed confirmed objective response rate according to Response Evaluation Criteria In Solid Tumors version 1.1. Efficacy and safety were analysed in all treated patients who received at least one dose of erdafitinib. This is the final analysis of this study. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02365597. FINDINGS: Between May 25, 2015, and Aug 9, 2018, 2328 patients were screened, of whom 212 were enrolled and 101 were treated with the selected erdafitinib 8 mg/day UpT regimen. The data cutoff date for this analysis was Aug 9, 2019. Median efficacy follow-up was 24·0 months (IQR 22·7-26·6). The investigator-assessed objective response rate for patients treated with the selected erdafitinib regimen was 40 (40%; 95% CI 30-49) of 101 patients. The safety profile remained similar to that in the primary analysis, with no new safety signals reported with longer follow-up. Grade 3-4 treatment-emergent adverse events of any causality occurred in 72 (71%) of 101 patients. The most common grade 3-4 treatment-emergent adverse events of any cause were stomatitis (in 14 [14%] of 101 patients) and hyponatraemia (in 11 [11%]). There were no treatment-related deaths. INTERPRETATION: With longer follow-up, treatment with the selected regimen of erdafitinib showed consistent activity and a manageable safety profile in patients with locally advanced or metastatic urothelial carcinoma and prespecified FGFR alterations. FUNDING: Janssen Research & Development.

Erdafitinib in Locally Advanced or Metastatic Urothelial Carcinoma.

BACKGROUND: Alterations in the gene encoding fibroblast growth factor receptor (FGFR) are common in urothelial carcinoma and may be associated with lower sensitivity to immune interventions. Erdafitinib, a tyrosine kinase inhibitor of FGFR1-4, has shown antitumor activity in preclinical models and in a phase 1 study involving patients with FGFR alterations. METHODS: In this open-label, phase 2 study, we enrolled patients who had locally advanced and unresectable or metastatic urothelial carcinoma with prespecified FGFR alterations. All the patients had a history of disease progression during or after at least one course of chemotherapy or within 12 months after neoadjuvant or adjuvant chemotherapy. Prior immunotherapy was allowed. We initially randomly assigned the patients to receive erdafitinib in either an intermittent or a continuous regimen in the dose-selection phase of the study. On the basis of an interim analysis, the starting dose was set at 8 mg per day in a continuous regimen (selected-regimen group), with provision for a pharmacodynamically guided dose escalation to 9 mg. The primary end point was the objective response rate. Key secondary end points included progression-free survival, duration of response, and overall survival. RESULTS: A total of 99 patients in the selected-regimen group received a median of five cycles of erdafitinib. Of these patients, 43% had received at least two previous courses of treatment, 79% had visceral metastases, and 53% had a creatinine clearance of less than 60 ml per minute. The rate of confirmed response to erdafitinib therapy was 40% (3% with a complete response and 37% with a partial response). Among the 22 patients who had undergone previous immunotherapy, the confirmed response rate was 59%. The median duration of progression-free survival was 5.5 months, and the median duration of overall survival was 13.8 months. Treatment-related adverse events of grade 3 or higher, which were managed mainly by dose adjustments, were reported in 46% of the patients; 13% of the patients discontinued treatment because of adverse events. There were no treatment-related deaths. CONCLUSIONS: The use of erdafitinib was associated with an objective tumor response in 40% of previously treated patients who had locally advanced and unresectable or metastatic urothelial carcinoma with FGFR alterations. Treatment-related grade 3 or higher adverse events were reported in nearly half the patients. (Funded by Janssen Research and Development; BLC2001 ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02365597.).

Veliparib with First-Line Chemotherapy and as Maintenance Therapy in Ovarian Cancer.

BACKGROUND: Data are limited regarding the use of poly(adenosine diphosphate [ADP]-ribose) polymerase inhibitors, such as veliparib, in combination with chemotherapy followed by maintenance as initial treatment in patients with high-grade serous ovarian carcinoma. METHODS: In an international, phase 3, placebo-controlled trial, we assessed the efficacy of veliparib added to first-line induction chemotherapy with carboplatin and paclitaxel and continued as maintenance monotherapy in patients with previously untreated stage III or IV high-grade serous ovarian carcinoma. Patients were randomly assigned in a 1:1:1 ratio to receive chemotherapy plus placebo followed by placebo maintenance (control), chemotherapy plus veliparib followed by placebo maintenance (veliparib combination only), or chemotherapy plus veliparib followed by veliparib maintenance (veliparib throughout). Cytoreductive surgery could be performed before initiation or after 3 cycles of trial treatment. Combination chemotherapy was 6 cycles, and maintenance therapy was 30 additional cycles. The primary end point was investigator-assessed progression-free survival in the veliparib-throughout group as compared with the control group, analyzed sequentially in the BRCA-mutation cohort, the cohort with homologous-recombination deficiency (HRD) (which included the BRCA-mutation cohort), and the intention-to-treat population. RESULTS: A total of 1140 patients underwent randomization. In the BRCA-mutation cohort, the median progression-free survival was 34.7 months in the veliparib-throughout group and 22.0 months in the control group (hazard ratio for progression or death, 0.44; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.28 to 0.68; P<0.001); in the HRD cohort, it was 31.9 months and 20.5 months, respectively (hazard ratio, 0.57; 95 CI, 0.43 to 0.76; P<0.001); and in the intention-to-treat population, it was 23.5 months and 17.3 months (hazard ratio, 0.68; 95% CI, 0.56 to 0.83; P<0.001). Veliparib led to a higher incidence of anemia and thrombocytopenia when combined with chemotherapy as well as of nausea and fatigue overall. CONCLUSIONS: Across all trial populations, a regimen of carboplatin, paclitaxel, and veliparib induction therapy followed by veliparib maintenance therapy led to significantly longer progression-free survival than carboplatin plus paclitaxel induction therapy alone. The independent value of adding veliparib during induction therapy without veliparib maintenance was less clear. (Funded by AbbVie; VELIA/GOG-3005 ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02470585.).

Prevalence of pathogenic germline variants in patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma.

PURPOSE: Germline pathogenic variants are estimated to affect 3-5% of renal cell carcinoma (RCC) patients. However, higher mutational prevalence in non-clear cell RCC (non-ccRCC) and advanced disease has been suggested. METHODS: To clarify the prevalence of pathogenic germline variants in metastatic RCC, we sequenced 29 cancer susceptibility genes in 294 unselected metastatic RCC cases plus 21 patients with clinical hereditary features. In 145 tumors, genes frequently mutated in RCC were sequenced and methylation was assessed in selected cases. RESULTS: Germline variants in RCC predisposition genes (FH, VHL) were detected in 1.4% of the unselected metastatic patients, with higher frequency in non-ccRCC versus ccRCC (6.4% and 0.4%; P = 0.0025) and in younger patients (P = 0.036). Among the 315 studied patients, 14% of non-type 1 papillary cases (4 of 28), all metastatic <1 year after diagnosis, carried a FH germline variant with loss of heterozygosity and tumor genome hypermethylation. Variants in other cancer-associated genes (e.g., MUTYH, BRCA2, CHEK2) occurred in 5.1% of the unselected series, with unclear significance for RCC. CONCLUSION: Our findings confirm a high prevalence of pathogenic germline variants in RCC predisposition genes in metastatic non-ccRCC, and highlight that metastatic patients with papillary type 2 or unconventional histologies compatible with FH would benefit from genetic screening.

Rucaparib maintenance treatment for recurrent ovarian carcinoma: the effects of progression-free interval and prior therapies on efficacy and safety in the randomized phase III trial ARIEL3.

INTRODUCTION: In ARIEL3 (NCT01968213), the poly(adenosine diphosphate-ribose) polymerase inhibitor rucaparib significantly improved progression-free survival versus placebo regardless of biomarker status when used as maintenance treatment for recurrent ovarian cancer. The aim of the current analyses was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of rucaparib in subgroups based on progression-free interval following penultimate platinum, number of prior chemotherapies, and prior use of bevacizumab. METHODS: Patients were randomized 2:1 to rucaparib 600 mg twice daily or placebo. Within subgroups, progression-free survival was assessed in prespecified, nested cohorts: BRCA-mutant, homologous recombination deficient (BRCA-mutant or wild-type BRCA/high genomic loss of heterozygosity), and the intent-to-treat population. RESULTS: In the intent-to-treat population, median investigator-assessed progression-free survival was 8.2 months with rucaparib versus 4.1 months with placebo (n=151 vs n=76; HR 0.33, 95% CI 0.24 to 0.46, p<0.0001) for patients with progression-free interval 6 to ≤12 months, and 13.6 versus 5.6 months (n=224 vs n=113; HR 0.39, 95% CI 0.30 to 0.52, p<0.0001) for those with progression-free interval >12 months. Median progression-free survival was 10.4 versus 5.4 months (n=231 vs n=124; HR 0.42, 95% CI 0.32 to 0.54, p<0.0001) for patients who had received two prior chemotherapies, and 11.1 versus 5.3 months (n=144 vs n=65; HR 0.28, 95% CI 0.19 to 0.41, p<0.0001) for those who had received ≥3 prior chemotherapies. Median progression-free survival was 10.3 versus 5.4 months (n=83 vs n=43; HR 0.42, 95% CI 0.26 to 0.68, p=0.0004) for patients who had received prior bevacizumab, and 10.9 versus 5.4 months (n=292 vs n=146; HR 0.35, 95% CI 0.28 to 0.45, p<0.0001) for those who had not. Across subgroups, median progression-free survival was also significantly longer with rucaparib versus placebo in the BRCA-mutant and homologous recombination deficient cohorts. Safety was consistent across subgroups. CONCLUSIONS: Rucaparib maintenance treatment significantly improved progression-free survival versus placebo irrespective of progression-free interval following penultimate platinum, number of lines of prior chemotherapy, and previous use of bevacizumab.

Rucaparib for patients with platinum-sensitive, recurrent ovarian carcinoma (ARIEL3): post-progression outcomes and updated safety results from a randomised, placebo-controlled, phase 3 trial.

BACKGROUND: In ARIEL3, rucaparib maintenance treatment significantly improved progression-free survival versus placebo. Here, we report prespecified, investigator-assessed, exploratory post-progression endpoints and updated safety data. METHODS: In this ongoing (enrolment complete) randomised, placebo-controlled, phase 3 trial, patients aged 18 years or older who had platinum-sensitive, high-grade serous or endometrioid ovarian, primary peritoneal, or fallopian tube carcinoma and an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0 or 1 who had received at least two previous platinum-based chemotherapy regimens and responded to their last platinum-based regimen were randomly assigned (2:1) to oral rucaparib (600 mg twice daily) or placebo in 28-day cycles using a computer-generated sequence (block size of six with stratification based on homologous recombination repair gene mutation status, progression-free interval following penultimate platinum-based regimen, and best response to most recent platinum-based regimen). Patients, investigators, site staff, assessors, and the funder were masked to assignments. The primary endpoint of investigator-assessed progression-free survival has been previously reported. Prespecified, exploratory outcomes of chemotherapy-free interval (CFI), time to start of first subsequent therapy (TFST), time to disease progression on subsequent therapy or death (PFS2), and time to start of second subsequent therapy (TSST) and updated safety were analysed (visit cutoff Dec 31, 2017). Efficacy analyses were done in all patients randomised to three nested cohorts: patients with BRCA mutations, patients with homologous recombination deficiencies, and the intention-to-treat population. Safety analyses included all patients who received at least one dose of study treatment. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT01968213. FINDINGS: Between April 7, 2014, and July 19, 2016, 564 patients were enrolled and randomly assigned to rucaparib (n=375) or placebo (n=189). Median follow-up was 28·1 months (IQR 22·0-33·6). In the intention-to-treat population, median CFI was 14·3 months (95% CI 13·0-17·4) in the rucaparib group versus 8·8 months (8·0-10·3) in the placebo group (hazard ratio [HR] 0·43 [95% CI 0·35-0·53]; p<0·0001), median TFST was 12·4 months (11·1-15·2) versus 7·2 months (6·4-8·6; HR 0·43 [0·35-0·52]; p<0·0001), median PFS2 was 21·0 months (18·9-23·6) versus 16·5 months (15·2-18·4; HR 0·66 [0·53-0·82]; p=0·0002), and median TSST was 22·4 months (19·1-24·5) versus 17·3 months (14·9-19·4; HR 0·68 [0·54-0·85]; p=0·0007). CFI, TFST, PFS2, and TSST were also significantly longer with rucaparib than placebo in the BRCA-mutant and homologous recombination-deficient cohorts. The most frequent treatment-emergent adverse event of grade 3 or higher was anaemia or decreased haemoglobin (80 [22%] patients in the rucaparib group vs one [1%] patient in the placebo group). Serious treatment-emergent adverse events were reported in 83 (22%) patients in the rucaparib group and 20 (11%) patients in the placebo group. Two treatment-related deaths have been previously reported in this trial; there were no new treatment-related deaths. INTERPRETATION: In these exploratory analyses over a median follow-up of more than 2 years, rucaparib maintenance treatment led to a clinically meaningful delay in starting subsequent therapy and provided lasting clinical benefits versus placebo in all three analysis cohorts. Updated safety data were consistent with previous reports. FUNDING: Clovis Oncology.

PTEN expression and mutations in TSC1, TSC2 and MTOR are associated with response to rapalogs in patients with renal cell carcinoma.

The mammalian target of rapamycin (mTOR) pathway inhibitors are key drugs for the treatment of many tumor types, however, there are no predictive biomarkers in clinical use. Here, we performed a molecular and immunohistochemical characterization of key mTOR pathway components in a series of 105 renal cell carcinoma patients treated with rapalogs, aimed at identifying markers of treatment response. Mutational analysis in MTOR, TSC1 and TSC2 was performed through targeted next-generation sequencing (NGS), and immunohistochemistry (IHC) was performed for PTEN, pAKT, pS6K1, pS6 and p21. Among patients with NGS data, 11 of 87 (13%) had mTOR pathway mutations (8 in MTOR, 1 in TSC1 and 2 in TSC2). When comparing the molecular data to the response of the patients, we found that partial response was more frequent in cases with mTOR pathway mutations than in those without mutations (odds ratio [OR] = 0.08, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.008-0.79, p = 0.030 univariate; p = 0.038 multivariable). Regarding IHC, negative PTEN staining was detected in 58% of the tumors, and it was more frequent in rapalog responder patients (OR = 0.24, 95% CI = 0.065-0.86, p = 0.029 univariate; p = 0.029 multivariable). Mutations and PTEN IHC were not mutually exclusive events and its combination improved response prediction (OR = 0.16, 95% CI = 0.04-0.62, p = 0.008 univariate; p = 0.013 multivariable). The staining of other proteins did not show and association with response and no association with PFS was observed in unselected patients. In conclusion, our findings suggest that mTOR pathway mutations, negative PTEN IHC and their combination are potential markers of rapalog response.

Molecular characterization of chromophobe renal cell carcinoma reveals mTOR pathway alterations in patients with poor outcome.

Chromophobe renal cell carcinoma (chRCC) is a histologically and molecularly distinct class of rare renal tumor. TCGA studies revealed low mutational burden, with only TP53 and PTEN recurrently mutated, and discovered alterations in TERT promoter and in the electron transport chain Complex I genes. However, knowledge on drug targetable genes is limited and treatments at metastatic stage do not follow a molecular rationale. In a large series of 92 chRCC enriched with metastatic cases, we performed an in-depth characterization of mTOR pathway alterations through targeted NGS and immunohistochemistry (IHC) of phospho-S6, tuberin, and PTEN. Mutations in mitochondria, telomere maintenance and other renal cancer related genes and p53 IHC, were also assessed. The impact on metastasis development and disease specific survival was determined, using TCGA-KICH series (n = 65) for validation. mTOR pathway mutations (MTOR, TSC1, TSC2) were present in 17% of primary tumors, most of them being classified as pathogenic. Mutations were associated with positive IHC staining of phospho-S6 and PTEN (P = 0.009 and P = 0.001, respectively) and with chRCC eosinophilic variant (P = 0.039), supporting a biological relevance of the pathway. mTOR pathway mutations were associated with worse clinical outcomes. Survival analysis gave a hazard ratio of 5.5 (P = 0.027), and this association was confirmed in TCGA-KICH (HR = 10.3, P = 0.006). TP53 mutations were enriched in metastatic cases (P = 0.018), and mutations in telomere maintenance genes showed a trend in the same direction. p53 IHC staining pattern was associated with the underlying TP53 defect, and negative PTEN IHC staining (82% of cases) suggested PTEN loss as a chRCC hallmark. In conclusion, our study provides with novel genomic knowledge in chRCC and identifies novel markers of poor survival. Furthermore, this is the first study showing that mTOR pathway mutations correlate with poor prognosis, and may help to identify patients with increased sensitivity to mTOR inhibitors.

The effect of age on efficacy, safety and patient-centered outcomes with rucaparib: A post hoc exploratory analysis of ARIEL3, a phase 3, randomized, maintenance study in patients with recurrent ovarian carcinoma.

BACKGROUND: In the phase 3 trial ARIEL3, maintenance treatment with the poly(ADP-ribose) polymerase (PARP) inhibitor rucaparib provided clinical benefit versus placebo for patients with recurrent, platinum-sensitive ovarian cancer. Here, we evaluate the impact of age on the clinical utility of rucaparib in ARIEL3. METHODS: Patients with platinum-sensitive, recurrent ovarian carcinoma with ≥2 prior platinum-based chemotherapies who responded to their last platinum-based therapy were enrolled in ARIEL3 and randomized 2:1 to rucaparib 600 mg twice daily or placebo. Exploratory, post hoc analyses of progression-free survival (PFS), patient-centered outcomes (quality-adjusted PFS [QA-PFS] and quality-adjusted time without symptoms or toxicity [Q-TWiST]), and safety were conducted in three age subgroups (<65 years, 65-74 years, and ≥75 years). RESULTS: Investigator-assessed PFS was significantly longer with rucaparib than placebo in patients aged <65 years (rucaparib n = 237 vs placebo n = 117; median, 11.1 vs 5.4 months; hazard ratio [HR]: 0.33 [95% confidence interval (95% CI) 0.25-0.43]; P < 0.0001) and 65-74 years (n = 113 vs n = 64; median, 8.3 vs 5.3 months; HR 0.43 [95% CI 0.29-0.63]; P < 0.0001) and numerically longer in patients aged ≥75 years (n = 25 vs n = 8; median, 9.2 vs 5.5 months; HR 0.47 [95% CI 0.16-1.35]; P = 0.1593). QA-PFS and Q-TWiST were significantly longer with rucaparib than placebo across all age subgroups. Safety of rucaparib was generally similar across the age subgroups. CONCLUSIONS: Efficacy, patient-centered outcomes, and safety of rucaparib were similar between age subgroups, indicating that all eligible women with recurrent ovarian cancer should be offered this therapeutic option, irrespective of age. https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT01968213.

Concomitant Medications and Risk of Chemotherapy-Induced Peripheral Neuropathy.

BACKGROUND: Peripheral neuropathy is the dose-limiting toxicity of many oncology drugs, including paclitaxel. There is large interindividual variability in the neuropathy, and several risk factors have been proposed; however, many have not been replicated. Here we present a comprehensive study aimed at identifying treatment and physiopathology-related paclitaxel-induced neuropathy risk factors in a large cohort of well-characterized patients. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Analyses included 503 patients with breast or ovarian cancer who received paclitaxel treatment. Paclitaxel dose modifications caused by the neuropathy were extracted from medical records and patients self-reported neuropathy symptoms were collected. Multivariate logistic regression analyses were performed to identify concomitant medications and comorbidities associated with paclitaxel-induced neuropathy. RESULTS: Older patients had higher neuropathy: for each increase of 1 year of age, the risk of dose modifications and grade 3 neuropathy increased 4% and 5%, respectively. Cardiovascular drugs increased the risk of paclitaxel dose reductions (odds ratio [OR], 2.51; p = .006), with a stronger association for beta-adrenergic antagonists. The total number of concomitant medications also showed an association with dose modifications (OR, 1.25; p = .012 for each concomitant drug increase). A dose modification predictive model that included the new identified factors gave an area under the curve of 0.74 (p = 1.07 × 10-10). Preexisting nerve compression syndromes seemed to increase neuropathy risk. CONCLUSION: Baseline characteristics of the patients, including age and concomitant medications, could be used to identify individuals at high risk of neuropathy, personalizing chemotherapy treatment and reducing the risk of severe neuropathy. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: Peripheral neuropathy is a common adverse effect of many cancer drugs, including chemotherapeutics, targeted therapies, and immune checkpoint inhibitors. About 40% of survivors of cancer have functional deficits caused by this toxicity, some of them irreversible. Currently, there are no effective treatments to prevent or treat this neuropathy. This study, performed in a large cohort of well-characterized patients homogenously treated with paclitaxel, identified concomitant medications, comorbidities, and demographic factors associated with peripheral neuropathy. These factors could serve to identify patients at high risk of severe neuropathy for whom alternative non-neurotoxic alternatives may be considered.

Rucaparib maintenance treatment for recurrent ovarian carcinoma after response to platinum therapy (ARIEL3): a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 3 trial.

BACKGROUND: Rucaparib, a poly(ADP-ribose) polymerase inhibitor, has anticancer activity in recurrent ovarian carcinoma harbouring a BRCA mutation or high percentage of genome-wide loss of heterozygosity. In this trial we assessed rucaparib versus placebo after response to second-line or later platinum-based chemotherapy in patients with high-grade, recurrent, platinum-sensitive ovarian carcinoma. METHODS: In this randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 3 trial, we recruited patients from 87 hospitals and cancer centres across 11 countries. Eligible patients were aged 18 years or older, had a platinum-sensitive, high-grade serous or endometrioid ovarian, primary peritoneal, or fallopian tube carcinoma, had received at least two previous platinum-based chemotherapy regimens, had achieved complete or partial response to their last platinum-based regimen, had a cancer antigen 125 concentration of less than the upper limit of normal, had a performance status of 0-1, and had adequate organ function. Patients were ineligible if they had symptomatic or untreated central nervous system metastases, had received anticancer therapy 14 days or fewer before starting the study, or had received previous treatment with a poly(ADP-ribose) polymerase inhibitor. We randomly allocated patients 2:1 to receive oral rucaparib 600 mg twice daily or placebo in 28 day cycles using a computer-generated sequence (block size of six, stratified by homologous recombination repair gene mutation status, progression-free interval after the penultimate platinum-based regimen, and best response to the most recent platinum-based regimen). Patients, investigators, site staff, assessors, and the funder were masked to assignments. The primary outcome was investigator-assessed progression-free survival evaluated with use of an ordered step-down procedure for three nested cohorts: patients with BRCA mutations (carcinoma associated with deleterious germline or somatic BRCA mutations), patients with homologous recombination deficiencies (BRCA mutant or BRCA wild-type and high loss of heterozygosity), and the intention-to-treat population, assessed at screening and every 12 weeks thereafter. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01968213; enrolment is complete. FINDINGS: Between April 7, 2014, and July 19, 2016, we randomly allocated 564 patients: 375 (66%) to rucaparib and 189 (34%) to placebo. Median progression-free survival in patients with a BRCA-mutant carcinoma was 16·6 months (95% CI 13·4-22·9; 130 [35%] patients) in the rucaparib group versus 5·4 months (3·4-6·7; 66 [35%] patients) in the placebo group (hazard ratio 0·23 [95% CI 0·16-0·34]; p<0·0001). In patients with a homologous recombination deficient carcinoma (236 [63%] vs 118 [62%]), it was 13·6 months (10·9-16·2) versus 5·4 months (5·1-5·6; 0·32 [0·24-0·42]; p<0·0001). In the intention-to-treat population, it was 10·8 months (8·3-11·4) versus 5·4 months (5·3-5·5; 0·36 [0·30-0·45]; p<0·0001). Treatment-emergent adverse events of grade 3 or higher in the safety population (372 [99%] patients in the rucaparib group vs 189 [100%] in the placebo group) were reported in 209 (56%) patients in the rucaparib group versus 28 (15%) in the placebo group, the most common of which were anaemia or decreased haemoglobin concentration (70 [19%] vs one [1%]) and increased alanine or aspartate aminotransferase concentration (39 [10%] vs none). INTERPRETATION: Across all primary analysis groups, rucaparib significantly improved progression-free survival in patients with platinum-sensitive ovarian cancer who had achieved a response to platinum-based chemotherapy. ARIEL3 provides further evidence that use of a poly(ADP-ribose) polymerase inhibitor in the maintenance treatment setting versus placebo could be considered a new standard of care for women with platinum-sensitive ovarian cancer following a complete or partial response to second-line or later platinum-based chemotherapy. FUNDING: Clovis Oncology.

Maintenance therapy with vinflunine plus best supportive care versus best supportive care alone in patients with advanced urothelial carcinoma with a response after first-line chemotherapy (MAJA; SOGUG 2011/02): a multicentre, randomised, controlled, open-label, phase 2 trial.

BACKGROUND: Maintenance therapy improves outcomes in various tumour types, but cumulative toxic effects limit the choice of drugs. We investigated whether maintenance therapy with vinflunine would delay disease progression in patients with advanced urothelial carcinoma who had achieved disease control with first-line chemotherapy. METHODS: We did a randomised, controlled, open-label, phase 2 trial in 21 Spanish hospitals. Eligible patients had locally advanced, surgically unresectable, or metastatic transitional-cell carcinoma of the urothelial tract, adequate organ function, and disease control after four to six cycles of cisplatin and gemcitabine (carboplatin allowed after cycle four). Patients were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive vinflunine or best supportive care until disease progression. We initially used block randomisation with a block size of six. Four lists were created for the two stratification factors of starting dose of vinflunine and presence of liver metastases. After a protocol amendment, number of cisplatin and gemcitabine cycles was added as a stratification factor, and eight lists were created, still with a block size of six. Finally, we changed to a minimisation procedure to reduce the risk of imbalance between groups. Vinflunine was given every 21 days as a 20 min intravenous infusion at 320 mg/m2 or at 280 mg/m2 in patients with an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status score of 1, age 75 years or older, previous pelvic radiotherapy, or creatinine clearance lower than 60 mL/min. The primary endpoint was median progression-free survival longer than 5·3 months in the vinflunine group, assessed by modified intention to treat. Comparison of progression-free survival between treatment groups was a secondary endpoint. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01529411. FINDINGS: Between April 12, 2012, and Jan 29, 2015, we enrolled 88 patients, of whom 45 were assigned to receive vinflunine and 43 to receive best supportive care. One patient from the vinflunine group was lost to follow-up immediately after randomisation and was excluded from the analyses. One patient in the best supportive care group became ineligible for the study and did not receive treatment due to a delay in enrolment, but was included in the intention-to-treat efficacy analysis. After a median follow-up of 15·6 months (IQR 8·5-26·0), 29 (66%) of 44 patients in the vinflunine group had disease progression and 24 (55%) had died, compared with 36 (84%) of 43 patients with disease progression and 32 (74%) deaths in the best supportive care group. Median progression-free survival was 6·5 months (95% CI 2·0-11·1) in the vinflunine group and 4·2 months (2·1-6·3) in the best supportive care group (hazard ratio 0·59, 95% CI 0·37-0·96, p=0·031). The most common grade 3 or 4 adverse events were neutropenia (eight [18%] of 44 in the vinflunine group vs none of 42 in the best supportive care group), asthenia or fatigue (seven [16%] vs one [2%]), and constipation (six [14%] vs none). 18 serious adverse events were reported in the vinflunine group and 14 in the best supportive care group. One patient in the vinflunine group died from pneumonia that was deemed to be treatment related. INTERPRETATION: In patients with disease control after first-line chemotherapy, progression-free survival exceeded the acceptable threshold with vinflunine maintenance therapy. Moreover, progression-free survival was longer with vinflunine maintenance therapy than with best supportive care. Vinflunine maintenance had an acceptable safety profile. Further studies of the role of vinflunine are warranted. FUNDING: Pierre-Fabre Médicament.

Evaluation of KDR rs34231037 as a predictor of sunitinib efficacy in patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma.

The identification of biomarkers able to predict clinical benefit from vascular endothelial growth factor receptor (VEGFR) tyrosine kinase inhibitors is urgently needed. Recently, Maitland and colleagues described an association between KDR-rs34231037 and soluble VEGFR2 levels as well as pazopanib pharmacodynamics. We investigated in a well-characterized series of metastatic clear cell renal cell carcinoma patients whether rs34231037 could influence sunitinib response. Clinical data and DNA were available from an international series of 276 patients. KDR-rs34231037 association with sunitinib response, clinical benefit, and progression-free survival was analyzed using logistic and Cox regression analyses. We found that G-allele carriers were over-represented among patients with clinical benefit during sunitinib treatment compared with those refractory to the treatment (odds ratio: 3.78; 95% confidence interval: 1.02-14.06; P=0.047, multivariable analysis). In conclusion, rs34231037 variant carriers seemed to have better sunitinib response than wild-type patients. Moreover, the association with tumor size reduction suggests that this single nucleotide polymorphism might also identify patients with successful tumor downsizing under anti-VEGFR therapy.

Exceptional Response to Temsirolimus in a Metastatic Clear Cell Renal Cell Carcinoma With an Early Novel MTOR-Activating Mutation.

mTOR pathway inhibitors are important drugs for the treatment of advanced renal cell carcinoma (RCC). However, no valid predictive markers have been identified to guide treatment selection and identify patients who are sensitive to these drugs. Mutations activating the mTOR pathway have been suggested to predict response; however, their predictive value is still unclear. Here, we present the genomic and functional characterization of a patient with metastatic clear cell RCC (ccRCC) who experienced a partial response to temsirolimus after a poor response to 2 previous lines of treatment. At the time of publication, the patient was disease-free 8 years after temsirolimus treatment. Multiregion whole-exome sequencing (WES) on 3 regions of the primary tumor, 1 metastasis, and blood revealed tumor mutations in driver genes in ccRCC: a missense mutation in VHL (p.W88L), a loss-of-function mutation in BAP1 (p.E454Rfs*15), and a novel missense mutation in MTOR (p.Y1974H). The MTOR mutation was present in all tumor regions, with similar allele frequency as the VHL mutation, and in vitro functional assessment of the MTOR variant demonstrated that it increased mTORC1 activity. Consistently, immunohistochemistry in the tumor samples demonstrated increased levels of phospho-S6. In conclusion, multiregion WES identified a novel MTOR mutation acquired early during tumor development as the event leading to a high sensitivity to temsirolimus treatment. This study supports tumor multiregion sequencing to detect truncal mutations in the mTOR pathway to identify patients sensitive to mTOR inhibitors.

Impact on clinical practice of the implementation of guidelines for the toxicity management of targeted therapies in kidney cancer. The protect-2 study.

BACKGROUND: The impact of such recommendations after their implementation of guidelines has not usually been evaluated. Herein, we assessed the impact and compliance with the Spanish Oncology Genitourinary Group (SOGUG) Guidelines for toxicity management of targeted therapies in metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) in daily clinical practice. METHODS: Data on 407 mRCC patients who initiated first-line targeted therapy during the year before and the year after publication and implementation of the SOGUG guideline program were available from 34 Spanish Hospitals. Adherence to SOGUG Guidelines was assessed in every cycle. RESULTS: Adverse event (AE) management was consistent with the Guidelines as a whole for 28.7% out of 966 post-implementation cycles compared with 23.1% out of 892 pre-implementation cycles (p = 0.006). Analysis of adherence by AE in non-compliant cycles showed significant changes in appropriate management of hypertension (33% pre-implementation vs. 44.5% post-implementation cycles; p < 0.0001), diarrhea (74.0% vs. 80.5%; p = 0.011) and dyslipemia (25.0% vs. 44.6%; p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Slight but significant improvements in AE management were detected following the implementation of SOGUG recommendations. However, room for improvement in the management of AEs due to targeted agents still remains and could be the focus for further programs in this direction.

Association of single nucleotide polymorphisms in IL8 and IL13 with sunitinib-induced toxicity in patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma.

PURPOSE: Earlier, the association of single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) with toxicity and efficacy of sunitinib has been explored in patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC). Recently, additional SNPs have been suggested as potential biomarkers. We investigated these novel SNPs for association with sunitinib treatment outcome in mRCC patients. METHODS: In this exploratory study, we selected SNPs in genes CYP3A4, NR1I2, POR, IL8, IL13, IL4-R, HIF1A and MET that might possibly be associated with sunitinib treatment outcome. Each SNP was tested for association with progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) by Cox-regression analysis and for clinical response and toxicity using logistic regression. RESULTS: We included 374 patients for toxicity analyses, of which 38 patients with non-clear cell renal cell cancer were excluded from efficacy analyses. The risk for hypertension was increased in the presence of the T allele in IL8 rs1126647 (OR = 1.69, 95 % CI = 1.07-2.67, P = 0.024). The T allele in IL13 rs1800925 was associated with an increase in the risk of leukopenia (OR = 6.76, 95 % CI = 1.35-33.9, P = 0.020) and increased prevalence of any toxicity > grade 2 (OR = 1.75, 95 % CI = 1.06-2.88, P = 0.028). No significant associations were found with PFS, OS or clinical response. CONCLUSIONS: We show that polymorphisms in IL8 rs1126647 and IL13 rs1800925 are associated with sunitinib-induced toxicities. Validation in an independent cohort is required.